You are a citizen, maybe a journalist or a scientist and you want to verify or simply access scientific information that has been published in a scientific journal. You don’t want to pay the $30 you are asked online for it (or just cannot). So what can you do?

You don’t understand why you have to pay for this 10-pages publication in the first place, when we have already paid 4 times for it. You have paid with your taxes the scientists who produced the work, and other scientists to edit and peer-review it for free in the journal, universities have paid (through your taxes) huge money to the journal (subscriptions), and scientists have often also paid the journal for publishing the paper (with public money).

But you know that I won’t talk to you about this problem if I did not have (temporary) solutions. Here are three, that scientists use a lot, when they have to:

1) You can get the article legally from the authors

Many authors upload their papers on their personal websites (at least a pre-print version), which are often automatically indexed when searching google scholar. If not, request the paper to the authors with a one-line email (they will never say no…if they are still alive).

2) Sci-Hub/Libgen

Almost all articles (46 millions) are available from Sci-Hub (alternative link), a website that uses proxies to access the papers for free (thanks to reseachers donating access codes).Before going through proxies, Sci-hub searches and stores in Library Genesis (LibGen), a pirate search portal for downloading books, which has a very large section for scientific papers. Given the domain names are regularly DNS-disabled in occidental countries, LibGen offers an .onion address (scihub22266oqcxt.onion) to be always accessible through Tor (Tor can pretend you are requesting the server from outside your country). Be aware that it is at your own (close-to-zero) risks: I cannot recommend you an illegal solution, but it is there.

3) Find it on repositories or networking websites

Researchers often post their work for free before publication in repositories, like arXiv (Physics, Maths, Computer science), bioRxiv (Biology), PeerJ PrePrints (Biology/Medecine), figShare (all disciplines), the French HAL* (all) and many others all here.You can search all of them at once through aggregators like BASE or CORE (this last one, from my experience, does not work well). Most universities recommand to submit non-open-access articles to those repositories (this is called green open access).Finally, Researchgate, or Academia.edu allow the authors to share their work with other academics: however, you will need to create an account with an academic email.

Scientists are fighting right now to change this absolutely ridiculous situation of non-access: I cannot even access my own publications in final format for free! The situation is so bad that many poor countries just cannot produce or access research because they cannot afford to pay such fees. Even the richest University of the world (Harvard) declared they cannot afford to pay the subscriptions anymore.

Some may think that sharing researcher’s publications is hurting them because it decreases their intellectual property revenues. This is totally wrong because no researcher has ever been paid in any way (to my knowledge) for his published articles. We are basically working for free for publisher groups that make billions of dollars (Elsevier’s 2014 revenue is $8.9 billion in 2013).

Scientists are so strongly convinced that public science is done for the common well-being and should always be freely accessible, that the situation cannot stay the way it is now. We may have a long lag before a permanent solution though, and non-scientists may not be aware of it when it finally comes. This is why I have shared those temporary solutions with you today.

I am not sure you have noticed it, but there is a silent revolution going on. People are turning green everywhere, and giant sustainable projects are sprouting up all over the world. Here are my TOP 8 of the best of 2014:

1. First US-China climate change agreement (USA-China)

All climate negociations have been strategically blocked by China and USA since the beginning. For the first time in history, future negociations can be taken seriously.

Let's hope USA and China will compete to be the best at cutting emissions, like a new race to the Moon.

2. The Canal Solar Power Project (India)

The Canal Solar Power Projectwill grow to 100 MW. The solar plants cover a canal, avoiding water evaporation (a huge deal in India) and sparing precious farming lands. The Punjab state tries to enter the Indian race for solar energy and will add 2000 MW to the solar park in the next 3 years, covering 5,000 km of canals and meeting 15% of their demand.

3. Construction of the 3 largest solar farms in the world (California)

4. Creation of the largest marine sanctuary (USA)

This is extremely important because it allows sustainable fishing. Fishing is forbidden in marine sanctuaries, so that fish can breed and develop peacefully. Less than 1% of the oceans are protected that way.

Most of the heat management is done automatically with sensors and smart programs. Cooling is done through geothermal wells and more electricity than needed is produced through renewable energy.

Water management is 10% of an average building. Each employee has a personal energy dashboard, showing how much energy she is using. Electric light will have to be used only 40 days in a year thanks to proper use of the daylight.

7. Zero-waste lifestyle is now possible (USA-UK)

Lauren Singer has received massive echo for showing that a total zero-waste lifestyle is possible: she produces only compost-able products.

I have tried it and by 3 weeks, I was able to decrease my waste to 15% of the average and my non-recycling/ compostable waste to 1% of the average. If you want to try, you can find help here, and this website is awesome.

Zero-waste restaurants are also opening. The first is a fast-food in Chicago, that uses wind energy. They cook everything themselves with no wrapping. The second, Silo, is a restaurant in London, that brews his own alcohol, uses solar panels, smart water and an expensive compost machine that can turn 640 kg of organic waste into compost in 24h.

For both of them, ingredients come directly from local farms and all deco/building materials were vintage/recycled.

8. San Francisco forbid plastic bottles to become zero-waste (USA)

The 4-million-people city plans to bezero-waste by 2020. They made composting and recycling compulsory for everybody in 2009, including hotels and restaurants, forbid plastic bags in 2007 and plastic bottles in 2014. They have already reached a 80% zero-waste.

New-York (population: 19 million) also thinks about creating garbage islands to help recycling compost and getting greener spaces in Manhattan (pic on the right).

God could look like a baby with a moustache

In the Bible, there is not a word about God's appearance. As a consequence, the Christian God could look like anything: a white star, a mountain in Egypt, a majestic tree, a cow, an Asian woman or a baby with a moustache. Or even an old muddy boot. Yet, every Christian would tell you that He does not look like an old muddy boot, but more like an old man with greyish beard and long hair. Definitively Santa Claus with a white toga. So if not in the Bible, where does that image come from?It seems to me that painters may have shaped God's believed appearance in Christianity, therefore that visual cognition shaped a naive concept of God. Can it be true?

How is God first represented in paintings?

I expected to find an easy answer but I did not. During the Roman Empire and after, holy characters are very often depicted in icons (religious works of art). The Church encourages to depict holy material and it is extremely trendy to have an image of a Saint or a piece of its remains. While Christ is abundantly represented, I could not find a single icon of God before the 15th century.

Icons of God may have been lost during the 8th century. In 726, a volcano near Santorini discharges deadly tsunamis on Byzantine Empire. For Leo III, the emperor in charge, the cause is clear: they made God angry in worshiping thousands of icons. Inspired by the Muslim soldiers who cumulate successful battles after forbidding any sacred image and even more, Leo conducts the first iconoclast: literally the "image-breaking", an edict forcing people to destroy all icons.

A representation of Christ: Juda's Kiss by Giotto, 1304.

However, on the western side, the situation is opposite: the Pope condemnes Leo III, he confiscates some of his villas in the West and continues to welcome icons. West and East jointly agree on that question with the Second Council of Nicaea in 787 but only for a short time until Leo V decides the second iconoclast in 814.

So why can we not find Western icons of God? Well, what applied to sacred characters does not apply directly to God. To catch that, listen to St. John of Damascus, that was yet a strong opponent to Leo's iconoclast:

"If we attempt to make an image of the invisible God, this would be sinful indeed. It is impossible to portray one who is without body: invisible, uncircumscribed and without form."

Although representing God is officially allowed, place yourself in the position of an artist at that time. You have the choice between:

following a successful career, painting somewhat boring sacred icons;

trying to depict God: meaning taking the risk of improperly depicting God. Remember that blaspheming against the Holy Spirit is the only unforgivable sin [5] according to New Testament. You may be properly banned, perhaps executed and your soul might be damned forever.

You would not take that risk, would you?

Because Christ is the incarnation of the invisible God, Christ is then the favoured way of representing God. It ended up in God weirdly shown as Christ's twin brother (see below)...

The Coronation of the Virgin, 1454; for Enguerrand Quarton, God divided into Jesus like...two identical bacteria after a cell division?

For the Trinity to be complete, the Holy Spirit is often added, almost always shown by a white dove, sometimes by adding a third twin, like on the Dogmatic Sarcophagus!

The Dogmatic Trinity Sarcophagus (Rome, 320)

Then, Christ was represented as old: a concept called "Christ of Apocalypse". An amazing one is this Christ of Apocalypse made by da Milano in 1364 (You can admire it at the National Gallery in London - see on the left).God was also partially revealed by timidly painting his hand, but anonymously, like in the two following works of art (I also put a later beautiful Verrocchio). It is a human hand: how will be the rest of the body?

What is the first painting of God's body?

For the moment, the older painting I found where you can see the full God, is the Trinity from Barnaba da Modena, in 1374. God is depicted as a hairy old guy and he is helping the Christ in his painful crucifixion. He is wearing a blue coat with golden lines with a orange top.The painting is the second part of a 4-part painting that appeared in a Spanish cathedral. The four animals are actually representations of the four gospel writers - demonstrating that God could have been represented as an animal here.I found it randomly in the National Gallery and it is more impressive for real. There is not much to say about Da Modena, except perhaps that it seems that this painting was one of the last ones he did.

The next one is the Pietà from the gothic Dutch artist Jean Malouel, in 1405 (see on the right). God looks like a hairy old man while he holds his dying son. It is clearly God because you can see the dove of the Holy Spirit just between them, to complete the Trinity. The painting can be seen in the Louvre and is more impressive in reality.

Jean Malouel was an important painter in France at that time, protected by the court of Burgundy. Strangely, the painting is more well-known for being the first circular painting (tondo) than for being one of the first representations of God.

However, Jean has two nephews: the Limburg brothers. The brothers probably created the 3rd and 4th images of God in 1411, with two illuminations of the fantastic "Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry" (below). On the first, you can see God quietly chatting in the Garden of Eden. On the second, God is quietly conducting a solar chariot (detail on the right).

I think the brothers just followed their eminent uncle's example in representing God similarly: a quiet old man with long hair and long white beard. I don't know how the Pieta was appreciated but the Duke of Berry was extremely happy about the brothers' illuminations.

Nonetheless, it is crazy courageous of them to dare depicting God in those times.

First image of God: Large round Pietà of Jean Malouel

Detail of Limburg brothers' work below: God quietly leading the sun in the sky.

Limburg brothers: "Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry" (1411)

After that, Renaissance in France starts up and the court of Burgundy actively leads it. All images of God will follow the same model with, at its apogee, Michelangelo's well-known painting below. Yet, all of this does not explain why God is painted that way on the first time.

Michelangelo, The Creation of Adam (1509)

Why God's first image is the one of an old man?

It may be a literal interpretation of the Genesis fragment in which God creates humans at his image and a literal interpretation of the concept of Father. If we are an image of God, God might look like a human, not a holy Cow. If he is a father, he looks like a male human older than Christ. But the official Christian interpretation of the concept of Father is simply a metaphor for the Creator of the universe. And humans as an image of God refers to the essence of humans, not their appearence: God is supposed to have no visual appearence and to be invisible. Furthermore, representing God as an old wrinkly man (an image of weakness) could have been regarded as sinful and a misinterpretation of the Bible: it neglects that the Christian God is immortal and powerful.

Interestingly, Adam Lewis commented below that it could come from a short description in Daniel 7:9, a jewish biblical apocrypha (i.e. unofficial text):"I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire."

Maybe you know that Jewish and Christian churches believe in a hierarchy of angels, in which the more powerful (the Cherubs and Seraphims, always next to God) are systematically depicted as babies. The less powerful angels, like the archangels are usually depicted as older men. So if you follow that logic, God should be shown as younger than a baby...

Choosing to depict God as a healthy delicate man, he would have been confused with Jesus.A better choice nowadays seems to be a woman: according to a psychology study [1], the mother conceptual image fits more God's image than the father image. Personally, I would have gone for a pretty cool cosmic giant turtle with four elephants on its back.

Painters received the burden of painting the Invisible (God) but they did not even try to suggest that invisibility. It is perhaps because we are not sure that God is really invisible. He is, according to Gospels [2] but Jacob and Moses have seen God in the Old Testament [3][4]...he could be kind of transparent. Using transparency seems a satisfying solution to that inconsistency, as do adepts of the Invisible Pink Unicornin their sacred symbol. The parody religion mocks religious nonsenses, when God is supposed to be something and its opposite. The Unicorn is then paradoxically pink and invisible.

Finally, how do we know that some painters did not paint God as a tree or an old muddy boot? We can tell that Malouel did represent God in the Pieta because its representation fits our visual expectation of God. In the beginning of the text, I was wondering whether our visual expectations come from paintings and shape our concept of God. It may be simply the opposite, that our (simplified) concept of God shapes our visual expectations and biases our interpretations of the presence of God in paintings.

PS: if you know older representation of God, please tell me!

The symbol of the Invisible Pink Unicorn

On the steps of God...

References:[1] Tamayo, A & Dugasa, A (1977) Conceptual Representation of Mother, Father, and God According to Sex and Field of Study. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied. 97:1. [2] "No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (John 1:18).[3] "So Jacob named the place Peniel, for he said, I have seen God face to face, yet my life has been preserved” (Genesis 32:30). [4] "Thus the Lord used to speak to Moses face to face, just as a man speaks to his friend". (Exodus 33:11).[5] The name of that sin is a bit misleading given that pretty everything enters into the blaspheming-against-the-Holy-Spirit category, like not believing in the Holy Spirit or asking for his forgiveness without really feeling sorry for your faults.